Homepage Garage Wiki Register Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
#Camaro6
Go Back   CAMARO6 > CAMARO6.com General Forums > 6th gen Camaro vs...


AWE Tuning


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-09-2019, 08:46 AM   #2969
Chadicus

 
Drives: 2017 2SS M6
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Billings MT
Posts: 773
Quote:
Originally Posted by newmoon View Post
It may be faster than a C7 Z06 but I'd rather have the Z06, over a base C8. At least it is the performance trim model of the Corvette line. The C8 is a base model that will be old news very quickly when GS and Z06 models arrive. It's like comparing a 1SS non 1LE to a ZL1. What model do you prefer.
If the C8 is faster than the C7 Z06 why would you rather have the slower worse performing car? A Corvette is not a Mustang or a Camaro. Every Corvette is a performance model.
Chadicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 08:51 AM   #2970
shaffe


 
Drives: 21 Bronco
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Carol Stream
Posts: 6,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
That is all I need to hear. These guys have nobody to lie to and nothing to lie about. Even if the Z51 did not outperform the Z06 it still would sell out. So you don't make that statement on a vehicle that is already gonna sell for no reason.
I agree this car was going to sell like hotcakes no matter what.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post

You keep saying that you want it to be true. Yet you keep trying to find reasons for it to not be true. Even when I mentioned that GM could be severely underrating the engine. Even when I mentioned what the C7 can do and compared the C8 differences as upgrades. So I can't make heads or tails of what you really want to believe.
.
I want it to be true, I just don't want to be disappointed if when numbers are released it's not as good as some people here are pumping it up to be. I would rather be wrong and pleasantly surprised then believe the hype and be disappointed. Just some of the numbers this car would have to hit, no other mid engine car does with out having more power or less weight.



Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
Do I think it's a tall order for GM to beat the outgoing Z06 with the new ME C8 Z51? Not one bit. I did think it was impossible. But if the guy who designed and tested both cars says it is true then who are we to argue? No one aspect is going to produce those results. But everything put together can. Gearing, ME design, tuning, tires, new chassis, engine, all of it works together. And small improvements in each of these areas could yield drastic results especially if Chevy is behind it all. Plus the C7 Z06 is a 5 year old platform that is unchanged. So for sure there is new technology out there that is being used that exceeds what was done 5 years ago. I think you are going to be stunned when they reveal the performance of this car. August 15th is the date.
I think having it be able to out do the C7 Z06 on a road course is entirely possible. That I have no trouble believing. The only thing I have trouble believing is the acceleration.

Lets say the specs for the Z51 come out and just for S&G say GM claims an 11.2 for the 1/4. That to me would be an amazing time, as its almost 3/4 of a second off the C7. That does not best the Z06 though are you going to be disappointed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldilocks01SS View Post
I am going to go out on a limb and say that the 495 horsepower rating is very underrated. I'd even go as far to say that it will dyno AT 495-500 hp AT the rear wheels.
It can't be underrated, its SAE certified.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dethsupp0rt View Post
The power figures have been SAE certified, so the figures are not underrated.

That said, it should be close enough to Z06 performance until you hit about triple digits, when traction is no longer an issue for the supercharged beast.

On a tight course, the base C8 should also be right there with the more powerful car.

However, anything that involves speeds beyond double digits is probably going to favor the Z06.

Personally, I have no problem giving up the LT4 power for a Z51 C8 w/MRC. If you're a drag racer, well, the base C8 probably isn't the car for you, although it certainly won't be a slouch. Low-mid 11s all day long.
I think this is accurate ^ On tight courses I think the C8 will beat the C7 Z.

The only thing I have trouble wrapping my head around is the acceleration.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 72MachOne99GT View Post
Lets keep it simple. ..
it has more power...its available power is like a set kof double Ds (no matter where your face is... theyre everywhere) it has the suspension to mame it matter...(
shaffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 09:02 AM   #2971
Chadicus

 
Drives: 2017 2SS M6
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Billings MT
Posts: 773
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaffe View Post





I think having it be able to out do the C7 Z06 on a road course is entirely possible. That I have no trouble believing. The only thing I have trouble believing is the acceleration.

Lets say the specs for the Z51 come out and just for S&G say GM claims an 11.2 for the 1/4. That to me would be an amazing time, as its almost 3/4 of a second off the C7. That does not best the Z06 though are you going to be disappointed?
I personally would not be disappointed in an 11.2.
Chadicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 09:52 AM   #2972
whiteboyblues2001

 
whiteboyblues2001's Avatar
 
Drives: 1SS, A8, MRC, NPP, Blade Spoiler
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: MD
Posts: 1,485
IF the car comes in at 11.2, I wouldn't be dissapoined in the car, because that's a solid time, BUT I would be dissapointed in GM telling us that it will beat the Z06 in all metrics, and then it didn't.

When the C7 Z06 came out, Chevy claimed 0-60 in 2.95 seconds, and a 1/4 mile of 10.95 at 127 mph. Now Chevy is claiming that the C8 Z51 will best these numbers. At this point, I expect a 1/4 mile time in the 10's. But that's not my expectation, that's Chevy's at this point. I can understand the skepticism, but time will tell...
whiteboyblues2001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 10:28 AM   #2973
Rodan
 
Rodan's Avatar
 
Drives: 2018 ZL1 coupe
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Prescott, Arizona
Posts: 589
I think some of you are underestimating how much difference the mid-engine chassis will make on the ability of the car to put the power down. Especially considering the shortcomings of the traditional 'Vette's rear suspension.

The chief complaint about the C7 ZO6 and ZR1 on the track is the inability to put the power down, and the lack of composure in the rear, I have no doubt a mid-engine platform that is better balanced would be able to match the ZO6 lap times with less power.

Same thing with 1/4 mile... if it can put the power down better, it's going to ET better for a given power level, though the mph will probably be lower.

There were members on the 'Vette forum posting high 10 sec ETs when the C7 first came out, though they were at tracks like Atco with ridiculous DAs. I won't be at all surprised to see the C8 run 10s in good conditions.
Rodan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 01:20 PM   #2974
BlaqWhole
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2017 Camaro ZL1 A10
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 7,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dethsupp0rt View Post
The power figures have been SAE certified, so the figures are not underrated.

That said, it should be close enough to Z06 performance until you hit about triple digits, when traction is no longer an issue for the supercharged beast.

On a tight course, the base C8 should also be right there with the more powerful car.

However, anything that involves speeds beyond double digits is probably going to favor the Z06.

Personally, I have no problem giving up the LT4 power for a Z51 C8 w/MRC. If you're a drag racer, well, the base C8 probably isn't the car for you, although it certainly won't be a slouch. Low-mid 11s all day long.
Were the LT1 engines not SAE certified also? I believe they were. And many of them were making 405 to the wheels. Which means that 455 number they gave was very underrated. Again I do not know if it was SAE but I think they were. If that is the case then I fully expect the C8 engine to be putting like
455-470 to the wheels. Which is what the C7s claimed to have at the crank. Or 40-60 more than what the C7s were making at the wheels. That alone is more than enough to drop ET by a significant amount.

And what about aerodynamics? Perhaps the C8 is by far superior to the C7 in that regard. I doubt it is any one of these things alone but everything put together that could allow the C8 to achieve more than the C7 Z06 could. Remember, GM switched to this design in the first place because the front engine design was very limited. It could be that the C8 took a huge jump ahead.

And I will repeat, comparing the C8 to the C7 Z06 looking at only the numbers is what many people are mistaken. You can't just keep looking at "650" vs "495" and finding it incomprehensible that the C8 Z51 is superior. Nor can you compare it to the other cars with ME design and more HP. Perhaps all those other ME cars are not as good as what GM could produce when only performance is the focus. We already saw that GM was keeping up with many of those Supercars in the past. Now with a better design I find it possible that GM could surpass them even if they have more HP or forced induction or AWD.

But we'll know next Thursday for sure.
BlaqWhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 01:21 PM   #2975
BlaqWhole
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2017 Camaro ZL1 A10
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 7,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rodan View Post
I think some of you are underestimating how much difference the mid-engine chassis will make on the ability of the car to put the power down. Especially considering the shortcomings of the traditional 'Vette's rear suspension.

The chief complaint about the C7 ZO6 and ZR1 on the track is the inability to put the power down, and the lack of composure in the rear, I have no doubt a mid-engine platform that is better balanced would be able to match the ZO6 lap times with less power.

Same thing with 1/4 mile... if it can put the power down better, it's going to ET better for a given power level, though the mph will probably be lower.

There were members on the 'Vette forum posting high 10 sec ETs when the C7 first came out, though they were at tracks like Atco with ridiculous DAs. I won't be at all surprised to see the C8 run 10s in good conditions.
I think everyone is going to be shocked. And I bet that whatever allocations are remaining will get swallowed up right after the specs are announced.
BlaqWhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 01:56 PM   #2976
Dethsupp0rt
 
Drives: None
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 462
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
Were the LT1 engines not SAE certified also? I believe they were. And many of them were making 405 to the wheels. Which means that 455 number they gave was very underrated.
405 hp measured at the wheels is about right though for something rated 455 at the crank, depending on the dyno used.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
And I will repeat, comparing the C8 to the C7 Z06 looking at only the numbers is what many people are mistaken. You can't just keep looking at "650" vs "495" and finding it incomprehensible that the C8 Z51 is superior.
Absolutely. There's a lot more at play here, namely the traction benefit with most of the weight being over the driven wheels, the DCT, the eLSD, etc.

However, given the weight and the power specs, I don't think there's enough to get into the 10s, which was the "official" time for the Z06 auto. I could see it matching the "official" Z06 manual time of 11.2 though, at best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
But we'll know next Thursday for sure.
Will we? I think they're only announcing pricing next week.
Dethsupp0rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 02:09 PM   #2977
shaffe


 
Drives: 21 Bronco
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Carol Stream
Posts: 6,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
Were the LT1 engines not SAE certified also? I believe they were. And many of them were making 405 to the wheels. Which means that 455 number they gave was very underrated. Again I do not know if it was SAE but I think they were. If that is the case then I fully expect the C8 engine to be putting like
455-470 to the wheels. Which is what the C7s claimed to have at the crank. Or 40-60 more than what the C7s were making at the wheels. That alone is more than enough to drop ET by a significant amount.

And what about aerodynamics? Perhaps the C8 is by far superior to the C7 in that regard. I doubt it is any one of these things alone but everything put together that could allow the C8 to achieve more than the C7 Z06 could. Remember, GM switched to this design in the first place because the front engine design was very limited. It could be that the C8 took a huge jump ahead.

And I will repeat, comparing the C8 to the C7 Z06 looking at only the numbers is what many people are mistaken. You can't just keep looking at "650" vs "495" and finding it incomprehensible that the C8 Z51 is superior. Nor can you compare it to the other cars with ME design and more HP. Perhaps all those other ME cars are not as good as what GM could produce when only performance is the focus. We already saw that GM was keeping up with many of those Supercars in the past. Now with a better design I find it possible that GM could surpass them even if they have more HP or forced induction or AWD.

But we'll know next Thursday for sure.
We can't compare it to other mid engine cars because GM is going to do it better on their first try then companies that have been doing it for decades got it lol That made me chuckle because it reads very fanboyish

Like I said, road course I could easily see it besting the Z06.

It's the pure acceleration I can't figure out. No matter how good and efficient the platform is eventually weight and horsepower are going to come into play. All I am saying is based on real world evidence from other similar vehicles it doesn't seem likely to be a sub 11 second car is all. You can happily serve me up crow if I am wrong lol.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 72MachOne99GT View Post
Lets keep it simple. ..
it has more power...its available power is like a set kof double Ds (no matter where your face is... theyre everywhere) it has the suspension to mame it matter...(

Last edited by shaffe; 08-09-2019 at 02:30 PM.
shaffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 02:44 PM   #2978
BlaqWhole
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2017 Camaro ZL1 A10
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 7,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dethsupp0rt View Post
405 hp measured at the wheels is about right though for something rated 455 at the crank, depending on the dyno used.
Giving it a 15% DT loss it should be around 380 the wheels.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dethsupp0rt View Post
Absolutely. There's a lot more at play here, namely the traction benefit with most of the weight being over the driven wheels, the DCT, the eLSD, etc.

However, given the weight and the power specs, I don't think there's enough to get into the 10s, which was the "official" time for the Z06 auto. I could see it matching the "official" Z06 manual time of 11.2 though, at best.
People have gotten into the 10s with less HP than that on a good tire and suspension setup. Gearing, trans, and weight reduction also helps. You can't just go off of weight to power these days. Especially when all those ratios were used for cars way back in the 90s before ECU tuning and trans technology took off. Cars are much different than they were when those equations were made. Look at the Camaro SS. It dropped 8 tenths to a full second going from the 5th Gen to the 6th Gen with only a 29 HP increase. The Mustang GT had a 25 HP increase and did the same thing. Certainly the trans, tuning, suspension, and tires came into play. Like I said, I think many people are stuck in how things used to be and old data and old tech instead of looking at how things are now.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dethsupp0rt View Post
Will we? I think they're only announcing pricing next week.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaffe View Post
We can't compare it to other mid engine cars because GM is going to do it better on their first try then companies that have been doing it for decades got it lol That made me chuckle because it reads very fanboyish

Like I said, road course I could easily see it besting the Z06.

It's the pure acceleration I can't figure out. No matter how good and efficient the platform is eventually weight and horsepower are going to come into play. All I am saying is based on real world evidence from other similar vehicles it doesn't seem likely to be a sub 11 second car is all. You can happily serve me up crow if I am wrong lol.
I am proud to be a fanboy. And I do believe that GM can do it better on their first try than a lot of these other manufacturers who have been doing it for decades. Most of those other cars sell no matter what. So performance does not have to be at their full potential. So for all we know Lambos and Ferraris and what have you all could have been underperforming for their design all this time. Who would have been there to challenge them? GM pushed to compete against them but it didn't really matter because they were never really a threat. And the only Vettes that could match them were pretty expensive anyway and all offered more HP and TQ. Now with a design on par with the best, perhaps GM can actually push the Vette to perform better than what the other companies were able to do even with the same design.
BlaqWhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 03:16 PM   #2979
shaffe


 
Drives: 21 Bronco
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Carol Stream
Posts: 6,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
Giving it a 15% DT loss it should be around 380 the wheels.
I think most modern transmissions are between 10-15% loss now but that depends on who you ask and if the dyno is happy or not lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
People have gotten into the 10s with less HP than that on a good tire and suspension setup. Gearing, trans, and weight reduction also helps. You can't just go off of weight to power these days. Especially when all those ratios were used for cars way back in the 90s before ECU tuning and trans technology took off. Cars are much different than they were when those equations were made. Look at the Camaro SS. It dropped 8 tenths to a full second going from the 5th Gen to the 6th Gen with only a 29 HP increase. The Mustang GT had a 25 HP increase and did the same thing. Certainly the trans, tuning, suspension, and tires came into play. Like I said, I think many people are stuck in how things used to be and old data and old tech instead of looking at how things are now.
Yeah but those are aftermarket tires, and aftermarket suspensions set ups that don't need to meet OEM standards. 5th to 6th Camaro we can see the huge gain is from the Alpha vs teh Zeta. We now know how amazing alpha is, as well as the A8 being better than the A6, and dropping a few hundred pounds.

Also you can ask anyone that has drag raced, going from high 12s to low 12s/11.9X is a hell of lot different than going from 11s to 10s.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
I am proud to be a fanboy. And I do believe that GM can do it better on their first try than a lot of these other manufacturers who have been doing it for decades. Most of those other cars sell no matter what. So performance does not have to be at their full potential. So for all we know Lambos and Ferraris and what have you all could have been underperforming for their design all this time. Who would have been there to challenge them? GM pushed to compete against them but it didn't really matter because they were never really a threat. And the only Vettes that could match them were pretty expensive anyway and all offered more HP and TQ. Now with a design on par with the best, perhaps GM can actually push the Vette to perform better than what the other companies were able to do even with the same design.
I'll disagree that Ferrari and Lamborghini have been underperforming.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 72MachOne99GT View Post
Lets keep it simple. ..
it has more power...its available power is like a set kof double Ds (no matter where your face is... theyre everywhere) it has the suspension to mame it matter...(
shaffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2019, 05:41 PM   #2980
BlaqWhole
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2017 Camaro ZL1 A10
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 7,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaffe View Post
I think most modern transmissions are between 10-15% loss now but that depends on who you ask and if the dyno is happy or not lol.



Yeah but those are aftermarket tires, and aftermarket suspensions set ups that don't need to meet OEM standards. 5th to 6th Camaro we can see the huge gain is from the Alpha vs teh Zeta. We now know how amazing alpha is, as well as the A8 being better than the A6, and dropping a few hundred pounds.
That wasn't the point shaffe. The point was that you can't say "weight per HP" anymore because those equations are antiquated. Also because there are many more factors that influence how a vehicle performs. I'm not talking about DRs. But since you brought it up, GM had those GY tires on the ZL1 that are basically as close to DRs as it gets without being a DR. Aftermarket tires are not making much improvement if any improvement at all over the stock ZL1 tires. And as far as the rest, that is exactly what I'm saying. That the 6th Gen Camaro made huge strides over the 5th Gen Camaro despite only having a 29 HP difference. It was because of al those things you mentioned (which I have been mentioning). The trans, tires, chassis, tuning, etc. So how is it that you can't seem to fathom that a Vette with a mid-engine design, 40 more HP, a way better trans, less weight, (presumably) better tuning, and a whole gang of advancements cannot make such a huge jump? We literally just saw a 455 HP 6th Gen Camaro SS beat a 580 HP 5th Gen ZL1 3 years ago. GM overcame a 125 HP difference easily. So how is it this difficult to understand that it is possible? They also literally have been saying that they cannot push the front engine design any further and that is why they switched to the mid engine design. And the literally just said that the Z51 will outperform the Z06 in every way. So I'm not getting how this is that complicated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaffe View Post
Also you can ask anyone that has drag raced, going from high 12s to low 12s/11.9X is a hell of lot different than going from 11s to 10s.
Weren't the Mustang guys over here saying that the GT can hit 10s "easily with only..."?? I seem to recall that all you need is a track pack and DRs and you can easily hit 10s no problem according to several of them that were over here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaffe View Post
I'll disagree that Ferrari and Lamborghini have been underperforming.
Well if they haven't then that shows just how good GM is at building performance cars. Because if they need all that much more HP to do what GM claims they are doing with "only" 495 HP, then that says a lot.
BlaqWhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2019, 07:22 AM   #2981
newmoon


 
newmoon's Avatar
 
Drives: 2019 GT350
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 3,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlaqWhole View Post
That wasn't the point shaffe. The point was that you can't say "weight per HP" anymore because those equations are antiquated. Also because there are many more factors that influence how a vehicle performs. I'm not talking about DRs. But since you brought it up, GM had those GY tires on the ZL1 that are basically as close to DRs as it gets without being a DR. Aftermarket tires are not making much improvement if any improvement at all over the stock ZL1 tires. And as far as the rest, that is exactly what I'm saying. That the 6th Gen Camaro made huge strides over the 5th Gen Camaro despite only having a 29 HP difference. It was because of al those things you mentioned (which I have been mentioning). The trans, tires, chassis, tuning, etc. So how is it that you can't seem to fathom that a Vette with a mid-engine design, 40 more HP, a way better trans, less weight, (presumably) better tuning, and a whole gang of advancements cannot make such a huge jump? We literally just saw a 455 HP 6th Gen Camaro SS beat a 580 HP 5th Gen ZL1 3 years ago. GM overcame a 125 HP difference easily. So how is it this difficult to understand that it is possible? They also literally have been saying that they cannot push the front engine design any further and that is why they switched to the mid engine design. And the literally just said that the Z51 will outperform the Z06 in every way. So I'm not getting how this is that complicated.


Weren't the Mustang guys over here saying that the GT can hit 10s "easily with only..."?? I seem to recall that all you need is a track pack and DRs and you can easily hit 10s no problem according to several of them that were over here.


Well if they haven't then that shows just how good GM is at building performance cars. Because if they need all that much more HP to do what GM claims they are doing with "only" 495 HP, then that says a lot.
Please link to where anyone said that DRs and a TrackPack only would get the GT in the 10s. I don't recall that ever stated.
__________________
2019 GT350 RR
2013 Boss Mustang
2012 SRT Challenger 392 auto 12:40s 112 stock
2012 Ford Mustang 5.0. Brembo, 3:73s
2010 SS, LS3, Cammed, LTs, 12:20s
2004 Redfire Cobra, Pullied & Tuned
1986 GT, Ed Curtis 347ci, 11:20s motor. 10:30s 100-hp shot
newmoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2019, 12:32 PM   #2982
hotlap


 
hotlap's Avatar
 
Drives: 20 1LE 2SS M6 Rally Green
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Franklin WI
Posts: 6,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by newmoon View Post
Please link to where anyone said that DRs and a TrackPack only would get the GT in the 10s. I don't recall that ever stated.
There was all sorts of comedy in this thread after the ZL1 killer, 18 GT A10 came out. In fairness, it needed e85 too,
https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showp...&postcount=836
Attached Images
  
__________________

"the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.”
Ronald Reagan -
hotlap is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.